Re: [WSG] layout - choices?
Barney is right about screen readers and tables. The behaviour varies insofar as some screen readers (such as Fire Vox) announce the presence of all the tables, some don't announce them at all and some (such as JAWS) announce some tables and not others. I am not sure how it decides which it does and does not announce. In any case users can usually identify and ignore the markup for layout tables very easily. A far bigger problem in my opinion is this recent fad for placing tabular data in definition lists. Where did that come from? The result really is incomprehensible because even the best screen readers can make little sense of the resulting code, no matter how semantically perfect it might be, whereas there are numerous tools for reading and navigating data tables if they are marked up correctly. I would disagree with the statement It is all semantics, and will be seen by most designers as fundamentally incorrect and misleading. I suspect the actual figure would be nearer 0.1% of designers, although most on this list would likely agree with the statement. Steve Barney Carroll [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bob, As long as you have an audio-only disclaimer just before stating The following object does not contain tabular data. Otherwise screen readers (supposedly) and standardist developers browsing your site in view-source mode (as one does) will get halfway through the content of your first td and suddenly come to the horrifying realisation What's going on?! This isn't cross-referencing data! and will lose all sense of context, suffer psychotic episodes, and never visit your site again. If you can live with that, go ahead. Just remove that beautiful-looking W3 tick logo from the bottom of your pages. [/joke] It is all semantics, and will be seen by most designers as fundamentally incorrect and misleading. However your page will still be valid and accessible, and it's very hard to conceive of a realistic user persona whose experience would suffer from this. There is a lot of mythology about screen-readers being utterly thrown by tables, but at the end of the day tables operate as you'd expect, in a linear fashion (as they are written in the code) - which is just how your layout would be written anyway. The name in and of itself of the tags is the only real contention here. So practically, you wouldn't be inconveniencing your users, but in theory you're wrong wrong wrong. Be warned. Regards, Barney *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Skip Navigation question
Barney Carroll [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Admittedly if you're entirely reliant on visual presentation and tab-browsing (what kind of a demographic is this, I wonder?), I can imagine some users might get infuriated at going through the header and starting to plow around the content and extras without being able to access that nav that's apparently 'right there'. I would start back-tabbing at this point, but I don't know if that'd occur to most. --- Many different user groups use keyboard-only navigation. People who cannot use a mouse would include those with conditions such as RSI, arthritis, shaking diseases, cerebral palsy etc. Some might use a normal keyboard but many use adaptive devices that emulate keyboards. Then there are those of us who just find it easier to use keyboard navigation on certain sites. I find myself doing this more nowadays especially on pages containing forms. I encounter a lot of sites where the page sometimes jumps when you click a link so you have to move the mouse and click it again. That obviously doesn't happen when using keyboard navigation. It would be great if browsers all had the kind of features you get in screen readers such the ability to jump to the next heading, list, form etc. That would make keyboard navigation a whole lot easier. Steve Green Director Test Partners Ltd / First Accessibility www.testpartners.co.uk www.accessibility.co.uk *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Flash is more accessible than CSS?
That's not taking things to an extreme - it's a totally different argument altogether. A screen reader is a user agent, not a plug-in. A person uses a screen reader because they want or have to, not because of the technologies used to build the websites they view. That's totally different from forcing all users to use a plug-in to view a site. With regard to building screen reader technology into a browser, it may benefit a small number of people but it's never going to negate the need for a fully featured screen reader that works with a wide range of applications. People with severe visual impairment need a screen reader that works from boot-up, not just when the browser is open. Steve Green Director Test Partners Ltd / First Accessibility www.testpartners.co.uk www.accessibility.co.uk Leslie Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi All, Just my penneth worth. I have always said anything that needs a plugin is automaticaly un-accessable. Trevor. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** Well...we could take this to an extreme - anything that requires a specialized application makes it automatically inaccessible. I'm thinking here of the need to use JAWS or other screenreader software to read web pages, for example. Which means such applications should be built-in, and I believe there are some to some extent (Opera?). Leslie Riggs *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Flash is more accessible than CSS?
I totally agree with your point about accessible content, which is why we have contributed towards Joe Clark's micropatronage project to raise money for research into the production of standards, training and certification schemes for captioning, audio description, subtitling, and dubbing. http://joeclark.org/micro/ We spend a lot of time advising companies (corporates actually are a lot more responsive than small companies, believe it or not) on how to create accessible content. Web standards are an important part of this, but are not enough on their own. We also run free screen reader demonstrations for developers to help them understand the issues relating to those users. www.accessibility.co.uk/free_jaws_demo.htm I made my previous comments because I think it's important to differentiate between the measures that designers should be expected to take (the technologies they use, alternate content etc), the capabilities we should expect from user agents and the measures users should take such as using appropriate user agents and learning to make best use of them. The onus is on all these groups to play their part, not just the developers. Steve Leslie Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You're talking to someone who deals with accessibility frustrations every single day of her life. I'd sure like to see that all spoken audio in electronic media (video games, video clips of newscasts on the Internet, etc.) be captioning/subtitling-enabled (can be turned on or off by the user). Unrealistic? I guess. Do you understand what I am saying? It doesn't have to be just a browser plug-in or a user agent. Perhaps I was being too subtle in my previous post. I get very tired of receiving snippy responses to my politely framed emails to corporations requesting they consider making transcripts of audio files and audio information in video clips available for download, if they're not going to consider captioning/subtitling video clips. I'm not asking for song lyrics, but I would sure like to know what those presenters were saying during the latest news releases, or emergency weather bulletins on those video clips on many news sites. Then there is the off-camera dialogue that is inaccessible to someone who cannot hear or understand it. Don't they want to reach the maximum possible audience and with the greatest impact? Web standards do help with respect to the Web and site design and so forth. Web accessibility standards make an attempt to improve things beyond the established Web standards. But it's not just an accessibility issue. It's also a functional equivalency issue. The trends in accessibility improvements are heartening, but we have a long way to go. Leslie Riggs *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] linked images in form labels
I agree with Mel's comments about losing the 'title' attribute, and would add that the use of a graphic prevents the user from changing the text and background colours too. Tooltips can be a nuisance for screen magnifier users unless they are conveying important information, in which case it ought to be in the on-page text because some user agents (such as screen readers and text browsers) do not display the 'title' attribute. The colour contrast is very high in tooltips, so 'title' attributes can be useful for people with visual impairments including magnifier users if the colour contrast in the text (or graphical representation of text) is poor. Of course the colour contrast should not be poor if you are designing a new site, but the designer does not always have total control over this (corporate branding guidelines etc). Steve Green Director Test Partners Ltd / First Accessibility www.testpartners.co.uk www.accessibility.co.uk Alexander J Jerabek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi everybody, Although this is valid (see snippet below), and there are alt and title tags for the image, does the following make sense from an accessibility or usability point of view? Are there any problems with this sort of markup? Thanks for any opinions, Sacha --snippet- label for=google a href=http://www.google.com/; img src=http://www.google.com/logos/Logo_40wht.gif; width=128 height=53 alt=Search Google title=Search the Internet using Google / /a /label input type=text name=q id=google value= / -end snippet *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Articles/reasearch/experience of screen readers
Hi Barney, We have a great deal of experience of user testing with screen readers and magnifiers, and provide testing and training services. I hope this is considered to be on-topic because web standards and semantic markup are very important for screen reader users. In fact they probably benefit more than most other users. You are only 25 miles from us (we're at Staines, by Heathrow) so you (and anyone else who is interested) are welcome to attend our free demonstration of the JAWS screen reader on Monday 27 November. It starts at 1:30pm and lasts about 3 hours. In conjunction with one of our blind testers I will be demonstrating how screen readers are used, the issues facing their users and some things that can be done to make websites easier to use. There are more details and a booking form at www.accessibility.co.uk/free_jaws_demo.htm but you will need to be quick because there are only 4 or 5 places left. If anyone would like to attend but cannot make it that day we will be running more demos next year (this is the fifth and last this year). Also anyone is welcome to drop in for a chat and a brief demo any time. Steve Green Director Test Partners Ltd / First Accessibility www.testpartners.co.uk www.accessibility.co.uk Barney Carroll [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear list, Not sure if this is exactly the place to ask, but I am very eager to get any authoritative (and by now, 'authoritative' can be qualified by anybody who's so much as seen one) information on screen readers. I am a css-enthusiastic web designer who sees the value of standards as a concept but does not necessarily bow to baseless trends, and more and more I see potentially brilliant ideas get shot down in the community because of 'standards' zealots who are very keen to violently condemn certain methods of working because of very dim notions of accessibility. While there is always common sense to fall back on, and we are lucky enough to live in a world with such a thing as the w3c, there are times when I become suspicious of accessibility precepts. You can't do this because screen readers will mess it up is incredibly common for inexperienced, adventurous web designers, before their imagination and creative approach to code is finally conditioned out of them without their ever being too sure why. Despite the fact I haven't been able to find anyone who has ever used a screen reader, I (have no choice but to) respect the notion that web sites should allow them a seamless, fulfilling, experience. I am obviously not doing this for any practical reward - as I've mentioned I have never had any contact with a screen reader user - for all I care they could not actually exist; but as a challenge to a very pure state of markup, the grail of smooth screen-reader navigation is worth achieving. Only I can never know if I have achieved it, because I can't test it; nor can I find anybody else to test for me, or even pin-point known problems. I think the myth surrounding screen readers is an incredibly bad thing because it fills the community with superstition. A great many otherwise intelligent, adventurous and imaginative potential innovators in the world of web design are completely crippled by this thing that they have no experience of whatsoever - it may as well be imaginary. w3c's accessibility guidelines are highly revered, and for the most part there is good cause for this - and as I've said I am a supporter of the notion of standardisation - but when talking about the precepts of design for the blind, I become very cynical because this stuff is pure idle theory from sighted people. I would love any links to articles/archived polemic/research studies/the appropriate list... If anybody here has actual experience of a screen reader, I would be overjoyed to hear from them. Likewise, if this is wholly irrelevant to this list then please tell me. :) Regards, Barney *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Articles/reasearch/experience of screen readers
Whether you use Fangs or a real screen reader it is difficult for a developer or tester to know if a website is really accessible unless they have an understanding of how screen reader users visualise a website and interact with it. There is a huge difference between being able to hear the content and being able to understand it. Whilst it is possible to make some generalities (as we do in our demonstrations) every user testing project reveals difficulties we would not have forseen. It is far too big a topic to discuss at length here, but problems include having too much content on a page, use of visual metaphors, and the meaning of the content being conveyed by the spatial relationship between two or more pieces of content. In each case all the content can be heard but it may not be understood. Complex tables and nested lists may be unintelligible despite being marked up perfectly in terms of semantics and standards compliance. And dynamic content (e.g. DHTML and AJAX) is a world of pain. Steve Green Director Test Partners Ltd / First Accessibility www.testpartners.co.uk www.accessibility.co.uk Rahul Gonsalves [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Barney Carroll wrote: Only I can never know if I have achieved it, because I can't test it; nor can I find anybody else to test for me, or even pin-point known problems. Dear Barney, For Firefox, this seems like an interesting utility. I haven't used it yet, but I think you might find it useful. https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/402/ Regards, - Rahul. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Articles/reasearch/experience of screen readers
That's because very few actually do a pretty darn good job. Most don't give screen reader users a moment's thought, and it is fortunate that they coincidentally benefit from some things that good designers do such as semantic markup and standards-compliant coding. Furthermore, I don't think that many designers understand how to design websites that are screen reader friendly even if they wanted to. How many designers have ever worked with a screen reader user and learned what the real issues are? Screen reader software could certainly be improved but most of the problems users face are not due to technical limitations. The problems mostly relate to understanding a linearised version of multi-dimensional content that lacks the visual styling and spatial relationships that make browsing easy for sighted users. Steve Green Director Test Partners Ltd / First Accessibility www.testpartners.co.uk www.accessibility.co.uk Michael Yeaney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And yet again...on the topic of screen readers, nobody has once mentioned the possibility that perhaps we as web developers a pretty darn good job, and that maybe it is the screen reader manufacturers that need the 'kick in the balls'why, I'm not sure - but it seems to be a trend. Mike *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Flash is more accessible than CSS?
I do know Leonie Watson and several of her colleagues at Nomensa personally, and they are highly regarded here in the UK. Leonie was the chairman of the Association of Accessibility Professionals - http://www.accessibilityprofessionals.org, an organisation that promotes accessibility and web standards. I suspect that whatever she wrote has been selectively edited to support the rest of the article (this has happened to me more than once). Steve Green Director Test Partners Ltd / First Accessibility www.testpartners.co.uk www.accessibility.co.uk Mark Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's a horrible wet Sunday so... Christian Montoya wrote: It's a really poor article altogether. Agreed The writer Katie Ledger is a *presenter* not a journalist of any depth or note AFAIK, so that explains the lack of research and understanding. only interviewed *1* person, not an expert, and clearly someone with their own bias. To be fair, Leonie Watson is blind herself [1] and seems at least as well qualified to comment on accessibility as most I've encountered. I don't know her personally (I live on the other side of the world) but I'm willing to accept her opinions as valid in her experience. I don't think you can dismiss her completely. The writer talked about *1* website, a completely unique example which took *a lot* of money and work to accomplish. That's a key problem with the article - it makes accessibility sound really hard and something you have to get experts in for. The writer didn't do her research about CSS, and never mentioned section 508, valid HTML or any of the other HTML-based accessibility/well-formedness measures. Writer != journo, as mentioned earlier. But you can't really knock a British writer for not mentioning an artificial American measure that only applies to American Government agencies. I agree about the lack of research though. The writer also mentioned *1* court case, and made it seem like only *1* person has a problem with Target. That's just not how you write articles. Throwing together all this barely related information results in an article that is just about useless to the reader. Click is a television program. Television is, by nature, superficial. My take on the piece (one of about 3 on the site) is that someone at the BBC said we really should do something about this accessibility thing. Who knows anyone? and from there the trail lead to Nomensa and Watson. Alex and Tony muttered about agendas and I do suspect that Nomensa has an agenda to do with Flash - it does appear to be the only technology mentioned on their site, and a quick search for CSS and Cascading Style Sheets turns up nothing. I suspect they put out a press release or something which someone handed to Ledger. I'm not sure what they expect to achieve with that agenda though... BTW They did a report [2] into accessibility of UK Central govt sites which is interesting, although Jan 2005 is an age away now. It's not downloadable from their website, but you can sneak it out of google ;-) [3]. [1] http://www.nomensa.com/about/key-people/leonie-watson.html [2] http://www.nomensa.com/resources/research/web-accessibility-in-central-government.html [3] http://www.iabf.or.kr/lib/common/download.asp?path=pdsfile=Nomensa_Central_Government_Report_Jan_2005.pdf Cheers mark *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] JAWS/ screen reader users
I would be happy to help. Steve Green Director Test Partners Ltd / First Accessibility http://www.testpartners.co.uk http://www.accessibility.co.uk Gavin Cooney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Guys, Any screen reader users out there who would be willing to take a few minutes out to help test a Flash app we have built for special needs kids to exams with? If you could please drop me a mail, i will send you a url and a login. Any help would be most appreciated. Regards Gavin PS i'll likely not reply for a few hours... it's midnight in ireland. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
